From: ScottW48@hotmail.com   
      
   On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 10:50:44 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:   
   > On 9/2/23 6:53 PM, ScottW wrote:    
   > > On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 10:41:37 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:    
   > >> On 9/2/23 11:56 AM, ScottW wrote:    
   > >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 8:07:23 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:    
   > >>>> On 9/1/23 9:03 PM, ScottW wrote:    
   > >>>>> because they'll take it back with revisions that are lightly   
   discussed.    
   > >>>> Jobs reports always get revised. It's not a Biden thing.    
   > >>>    
   > >>> Not to this extent.    
   > >> There's always revisions.    
   > >    
   > > Couldn't refute the evidence and had to snip it. Typical.   
   > There's no evidence the next revision is substantially different from    
   > the revisions given every preceding estimate.    
   >    
   > What you call a "a huge and very statistically significant difference"    
   > is just a statistical anomaly.    
      
   LoL.   Now you're just deliberately and obviously shoving your head up your   
   ass.   
      
   https://www.pymnts.com/economy/2022/1-million-reasons-why-fed-re   
   ised-jobs-report-demands-healthy-data-skepticism/   
      
   The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia said this week that only 10,500 net   
   new jobs were added during the second quarter “rather than the 1,121,500   
   jobs estimated” in previous employment reports.   
   The discrepancy of more than 1 million jobs far outstrips the usual roughly   
   150,000 revision..   
      
      
   ScottW   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)